Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING <br />OF THE <br />COLORADO WATER CONSERVATION BOARD <br />DENVER, COLORADO <br />DECEMBER 3-4, 1981 <br /> <br />Pursuant to the notice properly given (see Appendix A), the <br />Colorado Water Conservation met on December 3-4, 1981, at the <br />Rodeway Airport Inn, Quebec at 1-70, Denver, Colorado, Chairman <br />Jackson called the meeting to order at 9:32 a.m. on December 3, <br />1981, with the following members in attendance: <br /> <br />Robert A. Jackson <br />Chairman <br />Jeris A. Danielson <br />C, M. Furneaux <br />Floyd L. Getz <br />David W. Walker <br />(for J. William McDonald) <br /> <br />Richard W, Johnston, Jr. <br />D. Monte Pascoe <br />Frederick V. Kroeger <br />Herbert H. Vandemoer <br />Dennis M. Montgomery <br />(for J. D. MacFarlane) <br /> <br />Concerning the agenda, it was proposed that an overview of <br />items 7, 8, and 10 would precede deliberations and decisions on <br />any specific items. It was also decided that item 10 should <br />precede item 9. Mr. Vandemoer moved approval of the revised <br />agenda, Seconded by Mr, Getz, Motion was carried by a unanimous <br />voice vote. (See Appendix A.) <br /> <br />There being no minutes ready for consideration, the matter <br />was deferred to a later meeting. <br /> <br />Mr. Walker presented the Director's report on behalf of Mr. <br />McDonald. He summarized the memorandum on the Closed Basin <br />project provided and emphasized that the state's obligation for <br />its share of the currently proposed version would exceed the <br />existing authorization from the construction fund. A meeting has <br />been scheduled among federal, state, and local interests for <br />mid-December to clarify the various responsibilities and the <br />allocation of costs for recreation and wildlife features among <br />those proposed for mitigation and those for enhancement. The <br />state's obligation for provision of state lands and for <br />enhancement is estimated to be 91.47 million. <br /> <br />He then discussed the status of the South Platte <br />channelization project which may also have a funding deficiency <br />due to cost escalation, The staff is proceeding with land <br />surveying and appraisals of parcels, so a revised determination <br />of the state's obligation can be provided at a later meeting. <br /> <br />The Dallas Creek project can proceed to phase 2 with little <br />delay despite the unsettled issue of a revised repayment <br />cpntract, because language in the U,S. Senate appropriation bill <br />provides that construction can proceed without an executed <br />